If everyone donated 1 hour of pay a year how far would it go to help families in distress?

Question

For non-hourly people divide yearly pay by about 2080

Please see http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ar050fJ.NPDuU4No8g321Ibsy6IX?qid=20060707091041AArawBe

Answer 1

i think 1 hr of pay a year is a joke, there should be a max. income allowance and the rest donated to persons living below the poverty line. higher class people tend to think that people are poor cause they don't help themselves and in some cases, yes that is a factor, but in most cases people try, but it's often hard and very discouraging and not everyone has a good emotional and secure suport group behind them. when you live your life as a lower class citizen and most even below that, there is alot of insecurities about their past, present and future... do you thnk anybody really wants to be looked as a poor, bottom of the food chain person? no. many people just need help to break the cycle. if you only know living poor it's hard to know to want more. if there was a maximum money allowance (for ex. say 30 million) think of how much mmoney could be spread out through out the world. and the rich can still have their lavish lifestyle and the poor could at least get their heads out of the water and improve the ever growing poverty factor. i don't know just my thought....

Answer 2

I am appalled at the number of individuals who lack compassion. Until you have been at the poverty level you cannot fully appreciate what you do have. Shame on you for passing judgment on those less fortunate. Many individuals that are unemployed are educated professionals that have been downsized in the corporate world. They are no different from you or I.

One hour of pay a year which is only a few cents a day may not make a monumental difference, but it is a start.

Answer 3

Not very far. Because there will always be those refusing to help themselves.

Now, if you could put some sort of restrictions on who is helped, like:

1)People who were victims of natural disasters (lost their homes to a hurricane, etc) but can prove they have jobs, or at least had one until disaster struck

2)Victims of tragic accidents (car accident, etc and lost limbs, etc) but can prove they have jobs, or at least did until the accident

3) A parent whose spouse died, leaving them to take care of the child(ren) and they can prove either one or both parents worked until the death

I am sure there are other examples, but basically helping those who are working or have worked first.

But, if a person has never worked in their life and cannot give a good reason for it (note: being lazy, haven chosen to commit crimes instead, etc are NOT valid reasons)

Then maybe those that truly deserve the help can get it.

Answer 4

In this country, we already do. It's called taxes. But because we have no control over how that money is used it often does not serve the purpose it was intended for.

We have many organizations who sole purpose is to help the needy. They are the best place to put that money but we have no control over that either.

The only problem with your suggestion is the execution. Who would collect that money and who would decide where it goes? If you say the state or federal government then, as I say, they already do that.

Answer 5

It wouldn't help much in the long term. Look at the abuse of FEMA funds in New Orleans as an example. To help in the long term you must change people's habits and attitudes. Have you heard of the theory that if wealth in this country were redistributed equally that within several years all of the same people would have the money. You help people by teaching them, not by giving them money. You feed people by teaching them to grow food rather than by giving them food.

Answer 6

If some of these families in distress would spend one hour a year helping themselves or getting jobs they wouldn't need the rest of us. Who's helping you? There's no line over here of people wanting to pay my bills.

Answer 7

About as far as the pockets of the bureaucrats that would claim to disperse it to those families in distress. Why not just make a donation to FEMA.

Answer 8

Not very far. The people who run the charity would take a big percent for to pay for their salary and administrative fees.

Answer 9

Not very far. I am sure the cahruty you donatedthe money too would find some way to siphon off the money to pay their salaries, buy buildings, etc.

Answer 10

Your question just stressed me out. Please send money.